CVE-2025-39779 Vulnerability Analysis & Exploit Details

CVE-2025-39779
Vulnerability Scoring

Analysis In Progress
Analysis In Progress

Attack Complexity Details

  • Attack Complexity:
    Attack Complexity Analysis In Progress
  • Attack Vector:
    Attack Vector Under Analysis
  • Privileges Required: None
    No authentication is required for exploitation.
  • Scope:
    Impact is confined to the initially vulnerable component.
  • User Interaction: None
    No user interaction is necessary for exploitation.

CVE-2025-39779 Details

Status: Received on 11 Sep 2025, 17:15 UTC

Published on: 11 Sep 2025, 17:15 UTC

CVSS Release:

CVE-2025-39779 Vulnerability Summary

CVE-2025-39779: In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: btrfs: subpage: keep TOWRITE tag until folio is cleaned btrfs_subpage_set_writeback() calls folio_start_writeback() the first time a folio is written back, and it also clears the PAGECACHE_TAG_TOWRITE tag even if there are still dirty blocks in the folio. This can break ordering guarantees, such as those required by btrfs_wait_ordered_extents(). That ordering breakage leads to a real failure. For example, running generic/464 on a zoned setup will hit the following ASSERT. This happens because the broken ordering fails to flush existing dirty pages before the file size is truncated. assertion failed: !list_empty(&ordered->list) :: 0, in fs/btrfs/zoned.c:1899 ------------[ cut here ]------------ kernel BUG at fs/btrfs/zoned.c:1899! Oops: invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] SMP NOPTI CPU: 2 UID: 0 PID: 1906169 Comm: kworker/u130:2 Kdump: loaded Not tainted 6.16.0-rc6-BTRFS-ZNS+ #554 PREEMPT(voluntary) Hardware name: Supermicro Super Server/H12SSL-NT, BIOS 2.0 02/22/2021 Workqueue: btrfs-endio-write btrfs_work_helper [btrfs] RIP: 0010:btrfs_finish_ordered_zoned.cold+0x50/0x52 [btrfs] RSP: 0018:ffffc9002efdbd60 EFLAGS: 00010246 RAX: 000000000000004c RBX: ffff88811923c4e0 RCX: 0000000000000000 RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: ffffffff827e38b1 RDI: 00000000ffffffff RBP: ffff88810005d000 R08: 00000000ffffdfff R09: ffffffff831051c8 R10: ffffffff83055220 R11: 0000000000000000 R12: ffff8881c2458c00 R13: ffff88811923c540 R14: ffff88811923c5e8 R15: ffff8881c1bd9680 FS: 0000000000000000(0000) GS:ffff88a04acd0000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 CR2: 00007f907c7a918c CR3: 0000000004024000 CR4: 0000000000350ef0 Call Trace: <TASK> ? srso_return_thunk+0x5/0x5f btrfs_finish_ordered_io+0x4a/0x60 [btrfs] btrfs_work_helper+0xf9/0x490 [btrfs] process_one_work+0x204/0x590 ? srso_return_thunk+0x5/0x5f worker_thread+0x1d6/0x3d0 ? __pfx_worker_thread+0x10/0x10 kthread+0x118/0x230 ? __pfx_kthread+0x10/0x10 ret_from_fork+0x205/0x260 ? __pfx_kthread+0x10/0x10 ret_from_fork_asm+0x1a/0x30 </TASK> Consider process A calling writepages() with WB_SYNC_NONE. In zoned mode or for compressed writes, it locks several folios for delalloc and starts writing them out. Let's call the last locked folio folio X. Suppose the write range only partially covers folio X, leaving some pages dirty. Process A calls btrfs_subpage_set_writeback() when building a bio. This function call clears the TOWRITE tag of folio X, whose size = 8K and the block size = 4K. It is following state. 0 4K 8K |/////|/////| (flag: DIRTY, tag: DIRTY) <-----> Process A will write this range. Now suppose process B concurrently calls writepages() with WB_SYNC_ALL. It calls tag_pages_for_writeback() to tag dirty folios with PAGECACHE_TAG_TOWRITE. Since folio X is still dirty, it gets tagged. Then, B collects tagged folios using filemap_get_folios_tag() and must wait for folio X to be written before returning from writepages(). 0 4K 8K |/////|/////| (flag: DIRTY, tag: DIRTY|TOWRITE) However, between tagging and collecting, process A may call btrfs_subpage_set_writeback() and clear folio X's TOWRITE tag. 0 4K 8K | |/////| (flag: DIRTY|WRITEBACK, tag: DIRTY) As a result, process B won't see folio X in its batch, and returns without waiting for it. This breaks the WB_SYNC_ALL ordering requirement. Fix this by using btrfs_subpage_set_writeback_keepwrite(), which retains the TOWRITE tag. We now manually clear the tag only after the folio becomes clean, via the xas operation.

Assessing the Risk of CVE-2025-39779

Access Complexity Graph

The exploitability of CVE-2025-39779 depends on two key factors: attack complexity (the level of effort required to execute an exploit) and privileges required (the access level an attacker needs).

Exploitability Analysis for CVE-2025-39779

No exploitability data is available for CVE-2025-39779.

Understanding AC and PR

A lower complexity and fewer privilege requirements make exploitation easier. Security teams should evaluate these aspects to determine the urgency of mitigation strategies, such as patch management and access control policies.

Attack Complexity (AC) measures the difficulty in executing an exploit. A high AC means that specific conditions must be met, making an attack more challenging, while a low AC means the vulnerability can be exploited with minimal effort.

Privileges Required (PR) determine the level of system access necessary for an attack. Vulnerabilities requiring no privileges are more accessible to attackers, whereas high privilege requirements limit exploitation to authorized users with elevated access.

CVSS Score Breakdown Chart

Above is the CVSS Sub-score Breakdown for CVE-2025-39779, illustrating how Base, Impact, and Exploitability factors combine to form the overall severity rating. A higher sub-score typically indicates a more severe or easier-to-exploit vulnerability.

CIA Impact Analysis

Below is the Impact Analysis for CVE-2025-39779, showing how Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability might be affected if the vulnerability is exploited. Higher values usually signal greater potential damage.

  • Confidentiality: None
    CVE-2025-39779 does not compromise confidentiality.
  • Integrity: None
    CVE-2025-39779 does not impact data integrity.
  • Availability: None
    CVE-2025-39779 does not affect system availability.

CVE-2025-39779 References

External References

CWE Common Weakness Enumeration

Unknown

Protect Your Infrastructure against CVE-2025-39779: Combat Critical CVE Threats

Stay updated with real-time CVE vulnerabilities and take action to secure your systems. Enhance your cybersecurity posture with the latest threat intelligence and mitigation techniques. Develop the skills necessary to defend against CVEs and secure critical infrastructures. Join the top cybersecurity professionals safeguarding today's infrastructures.

Other 5 Recently Published CVEs Vulnerabilities

  • CVE-2025-9319 – A potential vulnerability was reported in the Lenovo Wallpaper Client that could allow arbitrary code execution under certain conditions.
  • CVE-2025-9214 – A missing authentication vulnerability was reported in some Lenovo printers that could allow a user to view limited device information or modify ne...
  • CVE-2025-9201 – A potential DLL hijacking vulnerability was discovered in Lenovo Browser during an internal security assessment that could allow a local user to ex...
  • CVE-2025-8557 – An internal product security audit of Lenovo XClarity Orchestrator (LXCO) discovered the below vulnerability: An attacker with access to a device ...
  • CVE-2025-8061 – A potential insufficient access control vulnerability was reported in the Lenovo Dispatcher 3.0 and Dispatcher 3.1 drivers used by some Lenovo cons...